1 / 39

Performance evaluation of Virtex-II-Pro embedded solution of Xilinx

Performance evaluation of Virtex-II-Pro embedded solution of Xilinx. Students: Tsimerman Igor Firdman Leonid Supervisors: Rivkin Ina Bergman Alexander. Agenda. Project goals Abstract Project resources System overview System implementation & results

lilly
Download Presentation

Performance evaluation of Virtex-II-Pro embedded solution of Xilinx

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Performance evaluation of Virtex-II-Pro embedded solution of Xilinx Students: Tsimerman Igor Firdman Leonid Supervisors: Rivkin Ina Bergman Alexander Technion Digital Lab Project

  2. Agenda Project goals Abstract Project resources System overview System implementation & results Results summary Possible improvements Technion Digital Lab Project

  3. Project goals Creation, integration & testing of Xilinx’s PLB Master core using standard IPIF. Comparing between hardware (FPGA) and software (PowerPC based) implementation. Estimation of performance level of Virtex II Pro embedded solution on real digital design example. Technion Digital Lab Project

  4. Power PC 405 Abstract • Some design requires use of external Logic Analyzer for testability purposes. Virtex II Pro may have the capabilities to serve as Programmable On-Chip-Logic Analyzer. • In order to achieve modularity and unification of design, it is preferred to build design around one standard bus. • Power PC or Hardware IP may be served as the analyzing units within Virtex II Pro, therefore their performance must be evaluated for this task on the same standard bus (PLB). Virtex II Pro Test Platform HOST Monitored BUS Technion Digital Lab Project

  5. Project resources Technion Digital Lab Project

  6. Project resources Technion Digital Lab Project

  7. Project resources • Virtex II Pro XC2VP30 – FF896 • ~30K ASIC gates • 136 18x18-bit Multipliers • 2448 Kb of BRAM (18K in each block) • 2 Power PC 405 CPU core (up to 300 MHZ each) • 8 DCM (digital clock manager) units • 8 Rocket IO transceivers (MGTs) Technion Digital Lab Project

  8. PowerPC and Master core doing the same logical function in data analyzing and being compared to each other in the end of the test. Power PC 405 Master core Counter 1 OCM Counter 0 Event counters count random events from Generator (Reference) and Master core. Generator System Overview System block diagram Virtex II Pro Timer (on OPB) Non critical intr Random event SW_EN SW EN block PLB SYS_RST Random event (reference) CLKDV Reset block DCM 0 Generator is creating mass stream of random and sequential data patterns. Technion Digital Lab Project

  9. Power PC 405 2 4 Master core Counter 1 OCM Counter 0 Generator 1 3 System Overview Virtex II Pro Start sequence Timer (on OPB) Non critical intr Random event SW_EN SW EN block PLB SYS_RST Random event (reference) CLKDV Reset block DCM 0 Technion Digital Lab Project

  10. Power PC 405 1 2 Master core Counter 1 Counter 0 OCM Generator System Overview Virtex II Pro Stop sequence Timer (on OPB) Non critical intr Random event SW_EN SW EN block PLB SYS_RST Random event (reference) CLKDV Reset block DCM 0 Technion Digital Lab Project

  11. Power PC 405 Master core PLB System Overview Random Pattern • Random event on PLB = Not increment by one of previous data 344 345 586 587 588 13 14 15 55 55 … Random events Technion Digital Lab Project

  12. Load Count to PLB Counter Din Random delay Max 5 bit Synchronized Random event Load Pseudo-Random Generator Din 32 bit 32 bit Controlled CLK System Overview Generator Block Diagram Technion Digital Lab Project

  13. Pseudo - Random Generator XOR 31 30 3 2 0 1 Shift right each clock System Overview Pseudo-Random Generator • The placement and number of XORs may vary • Random cycle is 2^32 in length • Initial pattern is const Technion Digital Lab Project

  14. System Overview ModelSim simulation results Technion Digital Lab Project

  15. System Overview Chip Scope results Technion Digital Lab Project

  16. System Overview Chip Scope results Technion Digital Lab Project

  17. System Overview Chip Scope results Technion Digital Lab Project

  18. System implementation & Results Power PC • Code and data in OCM • 32 bit data read • Power PC freq. = 300MHz, PLB freq. = 100MHz • The results were displayed at the end of the test via UART (Tera-Pro) Code example: Technion Digital Lab Project

  19. System implementation & Results Power PC – Chip Scope results Note: All Chip Scope results are measured at: PLB sys_clk freq: 100MHz Generator freq: 100/12 (8.33MHz) Technion Digital Lab Project

  20. System implementation & Results Power PC – Chip Scope results Technion Digital Lab Project

  21. System implementation & Results Power PC – Chip Scope results Technion Digital Lab Project

  22. System implementation & Results Power PC – Chip Scope results 20 sys_clocks between PPC read requests. Max freq: ~5MHz Technion Digital Lab Project

  23. System implementation & Results Power PC – Statistics results Technion Digital Lab Project

  24. System implementation & Results Master core • Single transaction configuration • Connected through standard IPIF 2.01a • Performs data analyzing operation similar to PPC operation Code example: Technion Digital Lab Project

  25. System implementation & Results Master core – Chip Scope results Note: All Chip Scope results are measured at: PLB sys_clk freq: 100MHz Generator freq: 100/12 (8.33MHz) Technion Digital Lab Project

  26. System implementation & Results Master core – Chip Scope results Technion Digital Lab Project

  27. System implementation & Results Master core – Chip Scope results 24 sys_clocks between Master core read requests. Max freq: ~4.16MHz Technion Digital Lab Project

  28. System implementation & Results Master core – Statistics results Technion Digital Lab Project

  29. System implementation & Results PPC & Master core – Chip Scope results Technion Digital Lab Project

  30. System implementation & Results PPC & Master core – Chip Scope results PPC: 18-22 sys_clocks between PPC read requests. Aver Max freq: ~5MHz Master:24 sys_clocks between PPC read requests. Max freq: ~4.16MHz Technion Digital Lab Project

  31. System implementation & Results PPC & Master core – Statistics results Note: the statistic results are regarding only PPC transactions Technion Digital Lab Project

  32. ResultsSummary PPC: 20 system clocks between PPC read requests. Max freq: ~5MHz Master: 24 system clocks between Master core read requests. Max freq: ~4.16MHz PPC & Master: PPC:18-22 system clocks between PPC read requests. Aver Max freq: ~5MHz Master: 24 system clocks between PPC read requests. Max freq: ~4.16MHz Technion Digital Lab Project

  33. ResultsSummary Power PC – Alternative test implementation Previous results are valid for certain design. For example, additional statements in PPC design will cause additional delay between PPC read requests and therefore, lower read frequency. Technion Digital Lab Project

  34. ResultsSummary Power PC – Alternative test implementation PPC: 28 sys_clocks between PPC read requests. Max freq: ~3.57MHz Technion Digital Lab Project

  35. ResultsSummary The conclusion: In current configuration Master core throughput is lower than PPC’s. Possible reasons: • PLB protocol limitations in single read transactions (Max freq: sys_clk / 6 = 16.66MHz) • IPIF latency time Technion Digital Lab Project

  36. ResultsSummary PLB protocol limitations Technion Digital Lab Project

  37. ResultsSummary IPIF latency time In this example, master core initiates single read transaction from slave on PLB through IPIF. We can see 23 clocks between Master’s request till valid data on BUS2IP_DATA signals. Technion Digital Lab Project

  38. Possible improvements • PPC: • Code optimization (assembly level) • Avoid single read transactions to the same address whenever possible • Use burst mode and cache transactions. • Master: • Avoid using standard Xilinx IPIF when using Master core on PLB (designing of embedded interface with PLB). • Use FIFO and burst mode transactions. Technion Digital Lab Project

  39. That’s it!!! Technion Digital Lab Project

More Related